Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 09:42:37 +0400 From: Andrej Zverev <az@freebsd.org> To: Jeremy Chadwick <jdc@koitsu.org> Cc: culot@freebsd.org, bapt@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Recent Mk/bsd.perl.mk changes (r320679) Message-ID: <CAD5bB%2BgMrttUuxcGGKUxCvP2No-y%2B8JzBRHLW51f%2BAUtMaTJoQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20130626001406.GA63314@icarus.home.lan> References: <20130626001406.GA63314@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, and first please accept my apologies for this situation. > pkg_add -r perl (this will install perl-5.14.2_3.tbz) > svn up /usr/ports > cd /usr/ports/whatever/p5-whatever > make install > pkg_delete p5-whatever As I know we are never supported mixing of ports and packages. If you initially installed something from package and decide to use ports in this case better to rebuild all or stay with packages. > > What I'd like to know: > > - Why the major.minor.patchlevel --> major.minor path change in the > first place. I have never, ever seen this done anywhere on any *IX > system I've used. Where's the justification? Was this discussed on > some perl mailing list somewhere as a "new and better way"? It's > essentially saying "x.y.z is always going to be compatible with x.y.z+1" > which is not true (particularly with XS, as I understand it). Where > was this discussed publicly? http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=26605+0+archive/2013/freebsd-perl/20130609.freebsd-perl I don't want to start yet another bikeshed here. Maybe link above will make some things more clear to you.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAD5bB%2BgMrttUuxcGGKUxCvP2No-y%2B8JzBRHLW51f%2BAUtMaTJoQ>